Death of Horatio Alger, Essay Example

Analysis of Paul Krugman’s article “The Death of Horatio Alger”

Krugman argues that today’s income disparity reflects the Gilded Age when the realization of the American Dream was just but a dream. Evoking Horatio Algier, which suggests a self-made man, Krugman’s arguments account for the end of class mobility, and, therefore, the vanishing of the American Dream.

Krugman yearns for the lost America of the ‘50s and ‘60s that he typifies as a “middle-class society.” In his view, while there was inequality during the era, Krugman opines that it was” better than the Gilded Age of the 1930s and ‘40s, which was characterized by income inequality and major class distinction. Krugman further contends that the present-day American society reflects the Gilded Age, as it is regarded for its widening gap between the rich and the poor.

Critically, two fundamental issues can be identified in Krugman’s article. These include the notion of class distinction, which also leads to the idea of bad inequality and good equality (2). In my view, however, the concepts that Krugman echoes in his article are not exclusive to the article, as they are prevalent research studies, which Krugman cites in his article. For instance, Krugman cites Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez, who he shows data from the Congressional Budget Office between 1973 and 2000, which showed the average real income of the bottom 90 percent of American taxpayers has actually fallen by 7 percent.” His decision to cite authorities and research papers in the field make his article more authentic and credible. The research findings also make his arguments more concrete and contextual to the current American society.

Even as Krugman points to the many social and economic disparities in the American society, I feel that he has failed to provide any recommendation on how such a society can be fixed. This means that Krugman’s article was a little biased.

In his discussion regarding the issue the American dream and class mobility, Krugman attempts to explain the absence of the issues in “The Death of Horatio Alger.” He considers money to have created a barrier to attaining the American Dream. In a society where richness and poverty shift recurrently, he explains that the American Dream is not achievable. In my view, money being such a deciding factor for almost everything in the American society today, I believe it stands in the way of the capacity of Americans to realize their American Dream, as they tend to focus on money.

Indeed, Krugman argues that money is the main contributor to class immobility and the fading of the American dream. He further explores how the poor Americans have only become poorer while the rich have become richer. In fact, it is based on this premise that Krugman argues that the American dream is just a dream. I agree with his argument since the members of the American society appear to be only concerned about how much money they can possess.

Krugman further shows that the American society is one where anybody can climb the ladder and move on to the next social status. This reflects the case of the Gilded Age. He gives an illustration of the Great Compression, which in his views is “a drastic narrowing of income gaps, probably as a result of New Deal policies” (224). I support his view since it is only then that the American Dream will remain nothing but a dream as the rich would continue getting money, the members of the middle class would remain in the same class division. In fact, Krugman further contends that still, there will remain a wide gap between the wealthy and the middle-class income. In my view, while the rich aspire to become richer the income gap is widened since they would still want to keep their money. This makes the poor to remain poorer. I agree with Krugman’s assertion. In the previous generations, people had to work hard for them to earn what they had and to maintain it. Today, people tend to inherit poverty or wealth from their parents. This is also clearly stated in Krugman’s article when he stated that the society is transforming into where the poor remain poor, despite their hard work and where sons inherit their socioeconomic status than their fathers a generation ago.

Throughout Krugman’s analysis, he warns that he stands to be accused of instigating “class warfare” because of his relentless focus on the issue of inequality. While I may not find accuse his for this, I do perceive some fault in the manner in which he characterizes class division as a struggle between groups that, in his view, are inherently static. Put differently, Krugman seems to have confused the issue of inequality by failing to make a distinction between the idea of caste and class. I perceive the two terms to mean completely different things. As May (554-8) explains, in a caste society, people tend to inherit or succeed their caste status from their fathers and mothers. According to Celarent (1664-9), it is strictly in exceptional cases where an individual can rise to attain a higher caste status. Here, it is birth, which determines his status in the society. A similar view is presented by Anderson (9-12), which argues that in a situation where differences in caste status prevail, the members in each caste division, except for those in the privileged status, share common interests, which is to eliminate their underprivileged situation brought about by their own caste. In my view, this is particularly true. A case in point was the old American society when all slaves were united by a common interest of abolishing slavery. However, this does not exist in a society, where all citizens are considered equal before the law. In my view, therefore, Krugman did not provide a logical argument in advancing the idea of distinguishing different classes among the people of the American society.

Overall, Krugman is a creditable author who is knowledgeable about what he is talking about. He cites various researches and experts, which indicate that he took a great deal of time exploring and analysis the issue of class distinction and income inequality. His chronological account of the shifts in American society also shows that he has a wealth of knowledge on the subject. For instance, he illustrates the Gilded Age America, which was a highly unequal society in the 1920s, and further shifts to the 1930s and ’40s America during the Great Compression. The Nation is a popular publication. Additionally, Krugman does not provide in-text citations or put up a Works Cited page, although he cites various sources and experts in his works. Based on his bio, it could be reasoned that Krugman is himself in the rich category of Americans. He was raised in the suburbs of New York City, which is a wealthy neighborhood. He also attended elite universities, including Yale University and Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Works Cited

Anderson, Patrick. “Supporting Caste: The Origins of Racism in Colonial Virginia.” Grand Valley Journal of History, 2.1 (2012):  1-15

Celarent, Barbara. “Caste, Class, and Race by Oliver Cromwell Cox.” American Journal of Sociology, 115. 5 (2010): 1664-1669

Krugman, Paul. “The Death of Horatio Alger: Our Political Leaders Are Doing Everything They Can to Fortify Class Inequality.” Nation, 2004

May, Ann Mari, “Caste, Class, and Social Change: An Institutionalist Perspective” CBA Faculty Publications Paper 18, 1992, pp.553-660